Especially in relation to large and complex manufacturing and processing plant, the efficient and safe operation of the plant typically depends heavily on the accurate and reliable operation of instrumentation. To ensure that the instrumentation provides accurate and reliable information it is customary for a service engineer periodically to conduct calibration checks such that the manufacturing or processing plant operates efficiently and maintains a required quality standard. Particularly because of potential safety implications a regulatory body typically will require that calibration is properly undertaken and, for the purpose of confirming compliance with regulatory obligations, there is a requirement often to provide calibration certificates.
In one long established method for generating hard copies of calibration certificates a service engineer will visit an equipment installation to obtain data from instrumentation and, typically, then enter the information on a pre-printed report sheet.
On return to the office the service engineer then conducts a comparison of the collected data with pre-established data relating to appropriate measurement and tolerances for the inspected instrumentation. Depending of the result of that comparison a calibration certificate is then prepared and issued to the equipment operator and/or regulatory body, or an adverse calibration report is issued. In the latter case it is a responsibility of the service engineer to alert the operator of the manufacturing or processing equipment to the need for remedial action and re-inspection.
Accordingly, it will be understood that the traditional, established procedures for generating calibration certificates or reports comprise a field calibration step which is carried out as a manual process, with measurements recorded on paper and then manually entered into the appropriate information system. From this data a calibration certificate is generated for instrumentation that is found to be in good order. This inevitably is a slow process and prone to human error.
Additionally there is a risk of human error resulting in a failure to provide an alert that any instrumentation requires remedial action, and to timely conduct a calibration re-check following remedial action in respect of defective instrumentation.